duplicity-talk archive search

Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ google: 307 ]

Total 307 documents matching your query.

161. Re: [Duplicity-talk] Killing duplicity correctly? (score: 2)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2014 10:55:17 +0200
ctrl+c or kill <pid> should both send SIGINT to the duplicity python process and having it stop gracefully. if that leaves a lockfile then thisd is a bug and should be fixed. ..ede/duply.net
/archive/html/duplicity-talk/2014-10/msg00014.html (5,410 bytes)

162. [Duplicity-talk] Killing duplicity correctly? (score: 2)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2014 23:19:01 +0100
Sorry for the utterly simple question, but I legitimately cannot find an answer, and I feel stupid for not being able to find it. Question simply is, how do I correctly kill duplicity? Every method I
/archive/html/duplicity-talk/2014-10/msg00012.html (4,998 bytes)

163. Re: [Duplicity-talk] Duplicity stops after 40 volumes (score: 2)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2014 10:40:12 +0200
isn't it good to have alternatives ;) ..ede/duply.net
/archive/html/duplicity-talk/2014-09/msg00005.html (20,180 bytes)

164. Re: [Duplicity-talk] Duplicity stops after 40 volumes (score: 2)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2014 14:14:16 -0500
On 9/3/14, 1:55 PM, address@hidden wrote: On 03.09.2014 20:19, Carlos Chavez wrote: On 9/2/14, 4:14 AM, address@hidden wrote: On 02.09.2014 00:12, Carlos Chavez wrote: I just installed a new CentOS 6
/archive/html/duplicity-talk/2014-09/msg00004.html (15,944 bytes)

165. Re: [Duplicity-talk] Duplicity stops after 40 volumes (score: 2)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2014 20:55:01 +0200
did you try to google it? seems to be a paramiko issue https://github.com/paramiko/paramiko/issues/49 ..ede/duply.net
/archive/html/duplicity-talk/2014-09/msg00003.html (18,231 bytes)

166. Re: [Duplicity-talk] Question about the TAR replacement format (score: 5)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 23:16:49 +0200
2014-06-09 17:33 GMT+02:00 Elvis Stansvik <address@hidden>: Hi all, I got interested in the archive format described at [1]. Is there still an interest in developing this format further and eventuall
/archive/html/duplicity-talk/2014-06/msg00007.html (7,164 bytes)

167. [Duplicity-talk] Question about the TAR replacement format (score: 5)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2014 17:33:42 +0200
Hi all, I got interested in the archive format described at [1]. Is there still an interest in developing this format further and eventually replacing the use of TAR in Duplicity? I have no particula
/archive/html/duplicity-talk/2014-06/msg00006.html (6,512 bytes)

168. Re: [Duplicity-talk] Google Drive vs. Google Cloud Storage (score: 68)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Sat, 07 Jun 2014 12:11:25 +0800
Hi Edgar, Unfortunately I do not seem to be able to reproduce the issue anymore. Found 1 secondary backup chain. Secondary chain 1 of 1: -- Chain start time: Sat May 3 03:30:22 2014 Chain end time: M
/archive/html/duplicity-talk/2014-06/msg00005.html (10,175 bytes)

169. Re: [Duplicity-talk] Google Drive vs. Google Cloud Storage (score: 68)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 11:54:35 +0200
can you confirm that your logs show the symptoms described by the bug thread starter? ..ede
/archive/html/duplicity-talk/2014-05/msg00081.html (6,684 bytes)

170. Re: [Duplicity-talk] Google Drive vs. Google Cloud Storage (score: 68)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 08:01:37 +0100
Thank you for the pointer; I have subscribed to the bug report. I'm happy to help test if that would help. Chris.
/archive/html/duplicity-talk/2014-05/msg00078.html (6,618 bytes)

171. Re: [Duplicity-talk] Google Drive vs. Google Cloud Storage (score: 68)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 11:06:18 +0200
check your logs.. you might suffer from the same issue as https://answers.launchpad.net/duplicity/+question/248111 ..ede/duply.net
/archive/html/duplicity-talk/2014-05/msg00077.html (5,942 bytes)

172. Re: [Duplicity-talk] Google Drive vs. Google Cloud Storage (score: 70)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 03:23:47 +0100
Just some feedback in case other people want to try Google Cloud Storage. I have been using Duplicity with GCS for 1,5 months now and so far so good. It's cheap at ~$4 / month for 200GB+ (inbound tra
/archive/html/duplicity-talk/2014-05/msg00076.html (9,019 bytes)

173. [Duplicity-talk] Google Drive vs. Google Cloud Storage (score: 67)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2014 16:06:17 +0800
Hi all, I understand that Duplicity supports both Google Drive and Google Cloud Storage through gdocs:// and gs:// respectively. Does anyone have a view on the (dis)advantages of using GD vs GCS as a
/archive/html/duplicity-talk/2014-04/msg00002.html (4,819 bytes)

174. Re: [Duplicity-talk] Massive cost cut for Google Drive (score: 34)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 16:47:24 -0500
After some reading, it looks like Amazon Drive is comparable to Dropbox, with auto-sync. (But no Linux version.) Amazon Cloud Storage is a more typical cloud backend with APIs, but the prices there a
/archive/html/duplicity-talk/2014-03/msg00018.html (6,229 bytes)

175. Re: [Duplicity-talk] Massive cost cut for Google Drive (score: 33)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 17:42:05 +0200
Hi, I see on the list that some people are using the gdocs backend for duplicity to use this service, but it sounds a little iffy. Can anyone weigh in with recent experiences?  At those prices, I'm
/archive/html/duplicity-talk/2014-03/msg00013.html (5,760 bytes)

176. [Duplicity-talk] Massive cost cut for Google Drive (score: 34)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 09:35:00 -0500
In case you missed it, Google Drive's new pricing is far lower than before. http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2014/03/save-more-with-google-drive.html 15 GB/Month: Free 100 GB/Month: $1.99 1 TB/Month fo
/archive/html/duplicity-talk/2014-03/msg00012.html (5,092 bytes)

177. Re: [Duplicity-talk] Duplicity Backup - check files uploaded to a backend against corruption using a checksum ? (score: 3)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Sun, 02 Feb 2014 13:21:58 +0100
Germar, i'd like you to rename the backend file to ~par2wrapperbackend.py to make sure that a theoretical future zzzbackend.py would be included as well. also could you please add documentation to th
/archive/html/duplicity-talk/2014-02/msg00002.html (15,611 bytes)

178. Re: [Duplicity-talk] Duplicity Backup - check files uploaded to a backend against corruption using a checksum ? (score: 3)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Sat, 01 Feb 2014 18:34:49 +0100
let's place this topic on the mailing list for others to find, shall we ;) Kostas, we already use checksums. "un"fortunately they are encrypted, in the manifest i think, so actual distorted gpg files
/archive/html/duplicity-talk/2014-02/msg00001.html (13,237 bytes)

179. Re: [Duplicity-talk] A few Q's about duplicity compared rsync (score: 2)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Sun, 05 Jan 2014 17:06:45 -0800
Well my guess is the main pain factor is the total size of the full backup plus all of the incrementals. I'd suggest running increments only for a while (say a month or two) and see how big they are
/archive/html/duplicity-talk/2014-01/msg00005.html (5,550 bytes)

180. Re: [Duplicity-talk] A few Q's about duplicity compared rsync (score: 3)
Author: HIDDEN
Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2014 20:40:06 +0000
Thanks for the response, it is much clearer now. So how much pain is it to restore a full incremental backup going up to a year? Let's say the base is 150GB, and the variance about 1GB a month. Doing
/archive/html/duplicity-talk/2014-01/msg00004.html (7,819 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu